The main groups in the Book of Mormon weren't really from different races--they came from the same genetic pool and I don't think that you can get to the point of "interracial warfare" in 800 years. I know in current popular usage we tend to think of indigenous people as "Lamanites", which tends to create the assumption of Nephites as being white, Europeans in contrast, but that wasn't the case in the BOM.

Alos, by the time of the final conflict, they had also had at least 200 years of distinguishing Nephites and Lamanites by levels of righteousness, rather than skin color or lineage. There were also a significant number of Mulekites mixed in, beginning at the time of Mosiah, and probably other groups.

The records of the prophets we have that make up the bulk of the Book of Mormon as we know it are the records of a particular group of leaders. They were selected as a particular narrative, but there were numerous other records by other groups. Mormon and the other compilers of the book mention many times that there were other stories and other records that were not included.

Anyways, I just hesitate to draw direct parallels from the Book of Mormon to our time because societal factors are not equivalent and because the Book of Mormon is not a comprehensive account of everything that the peoples ever did.

Those are good points. I too am skeptical of the "racial" lines drawn between the Lamanites and Nephites, but then I'm skeptical of racial lines anyway. They are whatever we say we are. This is speculative, but I don't accept Zarahemla's claim that Mulek was an Israelite. I think he was just jockeying for position with Mosiah. And all the within-the-Nephites tensions that arise fit pretty nicely if one assumes Nephites=freemen, Mulekites=kingmen. And since the Mulekites, we are told, greatly outnumber the Nephites, it is striking how many people claim the pure blood of Lehi.

(And you're right---it's likely other groups are represented in the population as well.)

I agree we should be careful when drawing parallels between ourselves and Book of Mormon peoples, but we should definitely do it. Nephi tells us to liken the scriptures, and Mormon tells us the stories he's compiling (and the lessons they teach) are intended specifically for us. Whether what I'm suggesting is a "correct" lesson is or not is, I think, less relevant than simply the obligation upon us to consider every possible lesson the book has to teach us.

I gotta say I think the racially charged lines were there, regardless of a mutual familial origin. Mormon clearly states that they were drawing such lines in 4th Nephi and Mormon chapter 1. I argue that the book IS written for our day and that as such so many things that wouldn't have made nearly as much sense in Joseph's day suddenly became crystalline in ours. Corihor's humanism for one.I'll also argue that Zarahemla and the Mulekites are absolutely who they say they are - the nature of their names and language verify it. I've gone through so much research looking into such and granted this is all just my opinion, but along the lines of the what I'll be posting in my Modern Mormon Men guest post (thanks for the recommend by the way) IF we believe, the confirmation of truth is there.Not to horribly blast my own shofar, but a lot of the Mulekite issues are answered in my latest novel Bless The Child. I wanted answers, I went looking and decided to share them in an entertaining rather than academic venue.